While many of Oregon's trade groups and business executives are lining up against the measures, the state's tech community is, by and large, sitting out the fight. That's because the measures pose a conflict between the industry's two highest priorities: Better public education, and a better business climate.

I've been asking tech industry execs about the issue for the past six months and have heard a consistent refrain: Whatever their opinions about these individual measures, they'd like to see broad reform in Oregon's fiscal policy, taxes and education system.

Maybe it's not just tech. Maybe everyone feels that way.

But in my five years at The Oregonian, I've been struck by another phenomenon -- our tech community has become disengaged from public policy and surrendered a leadership role in reforming the problems its leaders have identified.

(For example, there's no one from the tech community on the board of the Oregon University System.)

In California and Washington, two states where I used to live, tech executives are very involved in public affairs. On the national level, Intel's Craig Barrett and Paul Otellini have each publicly lobbied presidents on tax and education policy.

In Oregon, though, where Intel has its largest presence and many of its top executives, the company keeps a low profile in government affairs.

It wasn't always this way.

Folks like onetime Tektronix executive Debi Coleman, former Sequent CEO Scott Gibson and others were both running companies and speaking up in the '90s

Intel took an active role in state affairs when the company’s Oregon presence was growing rapidly during that decade. Oregon site manager Jim Johnson was deeply engaged in efforts to increase state higher ed funding and bolster engineering education before he left Intel.

But Intel doesn’t have an Oregon site manager any longer and its Oregon executives almost never give public talks -- on any topic -- inside the state, much less take a position on public policy.

Intel is still involved, Oregon affairs manager Jill Eiland says, but prefers to work in conjunction with other businesses. Intel can't speak for all its employees, she said, and doesn't want to advocate a policy change before consulting with other -- smaller -- businesses who may feel policy changes more profoundly than Intel.

“When it’s really about tax policy and what’s good for the future of Oregon, it doesn’t make sense for Intel to go it alone,” she told me last week.

There are some tech leaders who remained engaged, of course. A few examples:

Pixelworks founder and Chairman Allen Alley is running for the Republican gubernatorial nomination and campaigning personally against measures 66 and 67.

Judy Peppler, Qwest's Oregon president, has long been involved in Portland affairs and Qwest is a substantial contributor to the campaign against this month's ballot measures.

EasyStreet CEO Rich Bader is active on a number of fronts, including the board of the state's new broadband council, the Oregon Innovation Council and the Oregon Growth Account.

Portland's Josh Friedman, who runs the NedSpace coworking facilities in Portland, organized one forum to boost state support for entrepreneurs last year and another to oppose this month's tax measures.

Why aren't there more people involved?

Personally, I consider our tech community is quite fragmented. There isn't a lot of interaction, for example, between the software startups springing up in Portland and the hardware enterprises out the Sunset Highway. So there may not be much consensus on what's needed, and folks may simply not know one another well enough to find common ground.

Additionally, we're a state of outposts, not headquarters. Our homegrown tech companies have been shrinking for years. With fewer and fewer corporate HQs, and fewer and fewer people staffing those that remain, there simply aren't many execs to take leadership roles.

An out-of-state company with an Oregon site, meanwhile, may feel no great stake our affairs.

It's also a matter of time, and the lack of it, explained longtime Oregon tech lobbyist Jim Craven.

The modern technology business environment demands nearly every minute of an executive’s day, according Craven.

Jim Johnson, who beat the drum for higher ed at Intel, still does so occasionally as CEO of Portland-based Tripwire. But he's busy running a fast-growing company, and his staff said he didn't have time to take my calls this week when I sought his perspective on the ballot measures.

As a junior manager at Pixelworks, Sam Blackman said he paid close attention to public affairs. But now, as the CEO of Portland startup Elemental Technologies, Sam admits he's not always keeping up with what's going on outside his business.

"The challenge of running a technology company, and I'm as guilty of this as anybody, is you're working 80 hours a week," Sam says. "It's really hard to be proactive and go to Salem and say: This is how I feel."

What do you think? Should tech be more engaged? Why isn't it? Chime in on the comments below.